ArticleCellular reprogramming2015
Effective Oocyte Vitrification and Survival Techniques for Bovine Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer.
Article in Cellular reprogramming, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effect of Supplementation of Cryoprotectant Solution with Hydroxypropyl Cellulose for Vitrification of Bovine Oocytes.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bovine somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) using vitrified-thawed (VT) oocytes has been studied; however, the cloning efficiency of these oocytes is not comparable with that of nonvitrified (non-V) fresh oocytes. This study sought to optimize the survival and cryopreservation of VT oocytes for SCNT. Co-culture with feeder cells that had been preincubated for 15 h significantly improved the survival of VT oocytes and their in vitro developmental potential following SCNT in comparison to co-culture with feeder cells that had been preincubated for 2, 5, or 24 h (p<0.05). Spindle assessment via the Oosight Microscopy Imaging System and microtubule staining revealed that vitrified metaphase II oocytes (VT group) were not suitable for SCNT. However, enucleating and/or activating oocytes prior to freezing enhanced their developmental potential and suitability for SCNT. The cloning efficiency of the enucleated-activated-vitrified-thawed (EAVT) group (21.6%) was better than that of the other vitrification groups [enucleated-vitrified-thawed (EVT) group, 13.7%; VT group, 15.0%; p<0.05] and was comparable with that of the non-V group (25.9%). The reactive oxygen species level was significantly lower in the EAVT group than in the other vitrification groups (p<0.05). mRNA levels of maternal genes (ZAR1, BMP15, and NLRP5) and a stress gene (HSF1) were lower in the vitrification groups than in the non-V group (p<0.05), whereas the level of phospho-p44/42 mitogen-activated protein kinase did not differ among the groups. Among the vitrification groups, blastocysts in the EAVT group had the best developmental potential, as judged by their high mRNA expression of developmental potential-related genes (POU5f1, Interferon-tau, and SLC2A5) and their low expression of proapoptotic (CASP3) and stress (Hsp70) genes. This study demonstrates that SCNT using bovine frozen-thawed oocytes can be successfully achieved using optimized vitrification and co-culture techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.